Two law schools that have been in the news lately probably wish that they weren’t. That’s because they are attracting attention as vivid examples of the market dysfunction at work in the current system of financing legal education.
Indiana Tech
More than a year ago, I wrote about Indiana Tech Law School, one of several U.S. law schools founded since 2010. Even as proponents of the school’s creation were conducting a feasibility study to show that Indiana really needed a fifth law school, newly required ABA disclosures demonstrated that only half of all recent law school graduates were finding full-time, long-term J.D.-required jobs.
Indiana Tech Law School opened its doors last fall with only 28 first-year students, far fewer than the original target of 100. And on May 21 of this year, the school’s first dean and university provost, Peter Alexander, resigned both positions. According to the university’s press release announcing the move, “Alexander cited the achievement of the goals he had established for the law school to that point in time and a desire to pursue other employment opportunities as the reasons for his decision to resign.”
An Uncertain Future?
In addition to promoting Indiana Tech as unique, the school’s website introduces prospective students to the doctrine of caveat emptor:
“Like any new law school, Indiana Tech must be in operation for one year prior to seeking ABA accreditation. …The Law School makes no representation to any applicant that it will be approved by the American Bar Association prior to the graduation of any matriculating student.”
